I have been a scientist in the field of the earth and environmental sciences for 33 years, specializing in geologic disposal of nuclear waste, energy-related research, planetary surface processes, subsurface transport and environmental clean-up of heavy metals. I am a Trustee of the Herbert M. Parker Foundation and consult on strategic planning for the DOE, EPA/State environmental agencies, and industry including companies that own nuclear, hydro, wind farms, large solar arrays, coal and gas plants. I also consult for EPA/State environmental agencies and industry on clean-up of heavy metals from soil and water. For over 20 years I have been a member of Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the NRDC, the Environmental Defense Fund and many others, as well as professional societies including the America Nuclear Society, the American Chemical Society and the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.

Obama And Reinfeldt: A Hydro-Nuclear Bromance

Figure 1. Forsmark, Sweden. The site of the proposed nuclear waste repositories, one for short-lived radioactive waste from reactor operations, nuclear medicine, industry and research (surface facilities shown in foreground), and one for spent nuclear fuel (just out of view to the left). In the background are three nuclear reactors. The rock type is granitic. Just like in the U.S., these programs are funded by a Nuclear Waste Fund generated from a mil/per kWhr tax on the utilities having nuclear reactors. Source: SKB

During President Obama’s recent trip to Sweden, he made some very complimentary statements about that country during a press conference with Prime Minister Reinfeldt:

“What I know about Sweden, I think, offers us some good lessons. Number one, the work you have done on energy I think is something the United States can and will learn from. Because every country in the world right now has to recognize if we are going to continue to grow and improve our standard of living while maintaining a sustainable planet, we are going to have to change our patterns of energy use. And Sweden I think is far ahead of many other countries.”

Far ahead, indeed! Like the United States, the overwhelming share of low-carbon electricity comes from nuclear and hydroelectric. Except that Sweden has almost no high-carbon electricity generation. The U.S. gets 19% of its electricity from nuclear and 7% from hydro. Sweden gets 36% of its power from ten nuclear power plants, 42% of its power from hydroelectric, 4% from wind and 18% from other, which includes importation from other countries.

Some folks actually thought the President didn’t know Sweden was so nuclear and hydro-powered but mistakenly included nuclear into the climate-friendly mix. But Obama comes from Illinois, the most nuclear-powered State in the Union and he knows very well how much nuclear power has done for its economy, its emissions and its energy mix.

The true difference between Sweden and the U.S. is that we get about 66% of our electricity from fossil fuel while Sweden only gets 3 percent, and that from gas.

Sweden began taxing carbon emissions 20 years ago, beginning at about $100 per ton, rising to the present $150 per ton (Carbon Tax ). Since Sweden doesn’t have as many climate deniers as the U.S., this was not a big deal in Sweden. Compare that with the $15 per ton we propose and which gets slammed as being bad for business.

I dare say, it’s not coincidental that Sweden has one of the lowest inflation rates in Europe. It runs a budget surplus every year and it spends much more on research and development than the U.S. does per capita, lots of that on alternative biofuels to petroleum. Petroleum for automobiles is the only carbon emissions that still need lowering in Sweden.

So much for a carbon tax destroying the economy.

While energy independence in the 1970s was the driving force for Sweden moving to hydro and nuclear for electricity production, the carbon tax spurred a significant move from hydrocarbon transportation fuels to biomass while maintaining a strong bulwark against increasing fossil fuel use in all sectors, especially electricity generation.

As Emma Lindberg, climate change expert for the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, said of the carbon tax, “It was the one major reason that steered society towards climate-friendly solutions. It made polluting more expensive and focused people on finding energy-efficient solutions.” (Triple Pundit)

But there is a place in America that’s just as advanced in non-carbon generation as Sweden, and I’m sitting here right now. Washington State gets 64% of its power from multiple large hydroelectric dams like Grand Coulee, 10% of its power from a single nuclear power plant, 10% from coal, 8% from gas, 4% from wind and 4% from other. WA State is by far the least carbon-emitting state in America.

In fact, there’s so much low-carbon generation in WA that the State decided to make hydro not a renewable energy, so wind could get a market break (Hydro vs Wind). I mean, who cares about fish?

Sweden is also farther along in its commercial nuclear waste disposal program than the U.S. (SKB TR-10-52). The Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste ManagementWaste Management Company (SKB) is building two deep geologic nuclear waste repositories at Forsmark, Sweden. One will be for short-lived radioactive waste from reactor operations, nuclear medicine, industry and research. And the other will be for spent nuclear fuel (see Figure 1). They are on track to be licensed by 2015. There is also an interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel at Oskarshamn (see Figure 2).

Sweden has successfully applied the strategy recently put forth by President Obama’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) in its recommendations for a consent-based process in siting a nuclear repository, having an interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel, and having an agency directly responsible for the program.

But lest you think America is sleeping at the wheel, we also have an operating deep geologic nuclear waste repository. It’s called WIPP and is in the massive salts of New Mexico (Chris Helman – Nuke Us). It‘s presently licensed only for nuclear bomb waste, including some pretty hot stuff, but geologically and technically this site can take everything, better and cheaper than any other site (Chris Helman – Action on Atomic Waste). Hopefully that will happen before I die.

All in all, the hydro-nuclear mix works very well for Sweden, Washington State and the planet. We do know how to do these things safely and well. And with the public involved every step of the way.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Well if you have a brain at all you understand the economy, geography, culture and history of Sweden, is very different than the US. So take your comparisons and go somewhere else where folks are foolish enough to believe them. In addition we would need a lot more nuclear to be like them.

Barry calling someone brainless is not the most convincing sort of argument. What exactly is wrong with James comparisons, that people should not believe them. I think you can check this data yourself and find that it is all correct and not controversial. In other words it is not a matter of opinion. You could argue that Jim’s conclusion is wrong, but that doesn’t seem to be what you are doing as Jim points out he agrees that we need a lot more nuclear to get close to the energy mix of Sweden.

Unlike hydro and nuclear, wind and solar have a capacity value of zero, and are an economic drain. Sweden would even be richer if they understood this, and avoided wasting money on these fruitless technologies.

I don’t agree, Obama knows and appreciates nuclear. But the Democrats are generally against it, and even the Republicans didn’t support it when they were in power. The problem is nuclear has no constituency, no Texas like oil, or WV like coal. Obama promoted some loan guarantees for nuclear and he got crucified for it. But it’s been abundant gas, renewable mandates and general ignorance exploited by ideologues that have hurt nuclear, not Obama. The corporations and utilities haven’t helped either.

I would like to know more about the structure of Sweden’s Carbon Tax. An attempt was made here in Australia to implement one, but it was very flawed. The taxed entities simply passed the tax down to the consumer, making a lot of people very angry, pushing up electricity prices particularly and failed to do anything significant to reduce emissions.

Do you have any information to share on how their Carbon Tax is structured and administered?

Yes, the trick is to lower other taxes at the same time and not allow the utilities to increase their rates, difficult but doable. One white paper is at http://svebio.se/sites/default/files/Carbon%20tax%20paper.pdf a ppt presentation is at http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/research_products/Fiscal%20Policies/2_Cottrell_CarbonTax_IMF_UNEP_GIZ_2012_FINAL.pdf Brookings did a nice analysis in a broader tax/revenue discussion http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2013/03/12-carbon-tax-gale

WIPP license issues for power plant waste has been denied for years due to successful lobbying of so called envormentalists through courts. We have slashed our hydro facilities though absurb relicencing requirements and have put fish over humans. Sweden while a “democracy” is still actually a kingdom with a very politically strong and active monachy. Its smaller homogenious population with oil exports that alone provide the country with net export income puts the country at great advantages for energy policies over the USA. Sweden with 3% of the population of the USA also needs far less power then the USA. Comparing the USA and Sweden is as apples to oranges as well apples to oranges.

One interesting electric savings teck I noticed in Europe was devices actually turn off versus or standby. One actually has to go to the TV and turn it on before the remote works that alone saves millions of watts but that would be to much work in the USA :)